Skip to comments.In need of help to a question about a proposed bill regarding Valerie Plame
Posted on 01/17/2007 2:18:46 PM PST by Mo1
This was just brought to my attention and I need help in understanding what exactly this Bill/Amendment is about.
I tried calling over to the House of Representatives .. but they said there was no one there to help explain the details of this bill/amendment.
They suggested I go to Thomas.gov .. but I already did that.
Can any FReepers out there help direct me in the right direction and find a better way to locate what this is?
Title: For the relief of Valerie Plame Wilson.
Sponsor: Rep Inslee, Jay [WA-1] (introduced 1/16/2007) Cosponsors (None) Private bill
Latest Major Action: 1/16/2007 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select).
Provides for the relief of Valerie Plame Wilson.
And therein lies the real problem.
I will remain mystified until the end of my days, TruthNtegrity, why the Republicans didn't shout this and other key facts out from the floor of Congress. Too late now.
Thanks for the ping and link.
Thanks, but I'm sure if it came close to a vote, a few R's in the House would have voiced up. Unbelievable that they are trying to do this.
Sounds like this was a pre-planned thing. Wonder what's in it for Fitz? Did the Dems promise him a Supreme Court nomination when and if??
I am more familiar with the rules of the old Civil Service Retirement System than the new FERS under which all federal employees who started in the last two decades or so are covered.
Under Civil Service there is disability retirement, which a person can get if there is no *suitable* job that he can handle given his health. IIRC, it is 40% of the worker's "top three" (the average annual salary of the top three years of employment.) That is substantially less than what someone who stays the full 30 years receives.
With 30 years of service I think a federal employee could retire at any time under CSRS. I don't know whether the FERS rules are the same or not.
You have to be effing kidding me. And she's out shopping her book.
OK, Val. Here's your deal:
Light jail time for you and your pimp, contingent upon your NEVER being heard from AGAIN. Pay restitution for all of Mr. Libby's legal fees.
But Joe gets to keep the hat. He earned it by peddling your... self all over.
I'm just surprised this hasn't gotten bigger play...Seattle paper seems to be it for now....
If it is sponsored by Inslee, it can't be good. Why not call his office and ask him?
I knew a person who put a significant amount of money in a 401K plan (I think it was) with the understanding (I don't know the rules) that under an emergency an early draw had no penalties. Subsequently, the person discovered he was terminal and he could not get the money without paying the penalty. If the fact you are going to die is not an emergency then I guess I don't know what emergency means. He had medical expenses, probably disability retirement (which took time and was reduced) and no longer a pay check.
Changing the rules for ONE person is not right. Rules are rules and should apply to all no matter WHO you are! Valerie Plame can pound sand.
"God only knows what has flown under our radar."
Howlin, you are so right! Thanks for the ping.
Mo1 and RabidBartender, thanks for 'outing' this outrageous effort!
Thanks! Put the link on my home page.
Noticed that Upton of MI has one of these 'private bills' and Levin has two of them. The text isn't yet available.
After that, I get lost.
socks off, peeing in my pants.
Thanx! And here I thought I was denser than usual, trying to figure out how you connected PIMP with Joe! ;o)